DLSS can be setup for any resolution, but so far Nvidia only seems to be providing 4k and 2560 res implementations. Once these lower end cards come out I guess they'll enable it for lower resolutions.

I'm guessing the 1660Ti will be optimised for 2560 DLSS - not so sure about 4k, it might not have enough tensor cores to process 4k images fast enough. What it will mean is if you are ever struggling with fps and the game supports DLSS you can just click the button for a big fps boost at the cost of a minor drop in image quality. That will put it well ahead of cards without the tensor cores in those games.

Member

This selective DLSS thing is a bummer.. If I am not able to use those Tensor cores for 1080/1440p resolutions (That I am planning to purchase this card for), per my choice, it's a wastage of Die space IMO

It looks to be about 2/3 the size of TU106, which would put it at around 300mm2, give or take 15mm2. That isn't really big at all considering it's on a pre-existing manufacturing process 4-5 years old now (that has admittedly been tweaked) and is producing >700mm2 dies.

Given that it's about the same size as GP104, I wonder why they even did this at all as opposed to to just rebadging GP104. Turing isn't much more efficient than Pascal in perf/w, so they eliminated the cost-savings benefit of die size by tacking on the tensor cores. Are tensor cores really that important for midrange chips? I personally doubt it. I think Nvidia is betting too hard on proprietary hardware features for the mass market.

Lifer

I believe this is the performance without tensor cores.
My math told me week's ago it would be slightly slower than the gtxq1070 but I didnt account for the memory bandwidth increase.288gb vs 256gb for the 1070.

$280 and on par or faster than a gtx1070, with 192 tensor cores?
This card is half of a rtx2080 just like the 1060 was about half of a 1080 and the 960 was half of a 980.

This is the gtx1060 successor. About 31% faster than a 1060 for $35 more money.
Slot the 1660ti on this chart at the 1070 performance.

Lifer

I might get one. Hard to choose between the RTX 2060, GTX 1660 Ti, and GTX 1660. It will probably come down to price, for me. I'm not interested in any way in the RTX feature-set, unless those cores can be re-purposed somehow for DC work or mining.

Been on my RX 570 cards for like a year, time for an upgrade! I hope that Nvidia's drivers, and the HDMI 2.0 support, are working in these cards.

I've had trouble, with GTX 1050 / 3GB / Ti and GTX 1060 3GB cards, not recognizing my 40" Avera UHD TV properly, and I am stuck with a reduced color-depth, really rather dismal-looking, visually, as compared to with my RX 570 cards (bold and bright, good colors / contrast). Worst yet, I don't think that I had any flexibility to change the NV driver settings. Like it wasn't detecting HDMI 2.0 support somewhere.

At 230 and 280 USD, Turing GTX has the same cores-price ratio as the RTX 2060 does. For example, for 1.25x price, one can get 1.25x performance, plus hardware ray tracing. RT is a 'free' value-added feature.

I suppose Turing GTX would have to settle below MSRP like Radeon RX 590.